Posted
by
timothy
on Thursday December 22, 2011 @01:00PM
from the baptists-pay-for-bootleggers'-road-trips dept.

Shivetya writes with a list of prices for upcoming models from Tesla, noting that "they aren't cheap and the prices are listed assuming the $7500 tax credit. A 160-mile range S will set you back $49,900, the 230-mile is at $59,000, and the 300-mile range S will cost $69,000. Battery sizes are 40, 60, and 85kwh respectively. For your money these cars also include a very large seventeen-inch touchscreen. Is this the electric car you've been waiting for or another rich person's toy?"

We need the rich guys to buy it first, so the rest of us can pick them up when they get mass market - if there is a mass market (which personally I think there is)
The first "motorized carriages" were quite definitely impractical toys for the rich. See also the first airplanes and pretty much "the first anythings"

The problem with that statement is that it is an average. Probably close to zero Americans actually drive 40 miles per day. The point is this: Only rich people can afford a $60,000 car that is worthless other than for everyday commuting along with a second vehicle for longer trips where stopping for several hours after every 2 hours of driving is impractical. The average American may drive 40 miles per day, but the average American probably does make a one-way driving trip of over 160 miles at least a couple times a year (twice per major traveling holiday).

The average American, in your case, can rent a car twice a year. In fact, they frequently do so after getting in an airplane and travelling many miles. Plenty of people never drive their personal car over 250 miles (the larger range offered) in a single day... ever.

diyelectriccar.com is the main source for me. I used off the shelf contactor and controller. Used forklift motor set me back 100$ shipped on ebay. 00 wire is about as small as you should consider in my book. After using the forum to determine how easy it was, i didn't even read the manuals that came with the parts. It's harder to hook up a surround sound system(more wires). These wires are just bigger. Oh, and mounting the motor to the transmission is only as hard as you make it. I welded a pulley to a piece of the original clutch.(google electriclemon for more info on this part.) https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.109683400126.117327.665000126&type=1&l=0a028722c1 [facebook.com] i have photos up there.

need the rich guys to buy it first, so the rest of us can pick them up when they get mass market

Henry Ford did it the other way around.

What he saw were limited production run cars built for the luxury market and almost useless beyond the city limits because the infrastructure wasn't there to support them.

What he saw was that mass market sales would generate enormous funds for R&D.

The Ford could cruise comfortably at 35-45 miles an hour over the worst roads imaginable at a cost of a penny a mile. Portal to portal service for a family of four and their dog and cat for twenty percent of the pric

Ford was also by no means the first car. There were many rich people running around in their horseless cariages long before Ford got in to the game, and without them, it's hard to say if Ford would have been able to do what he did.

Yes and no. Obviously "rich guy" is a relative term but there are plenty of people who plunk down $40K on full-size pickup trucks and SUVs that are firmly seated in the middle of the middle-class. Is it a wise choice given alternatives? Debatable. But the $50K base model is definitely not a "rich guy toy" just a white-collar guy toy.

I'm a software engineer and not what most people in the Western world would call rich, just "comfortable" in my income. I'm actually giving the car serious consideration for purchase in a few years after the lease expires on the next car I'm getting in a month or two. By then hopefully the bugs will be more or less ironed out and production ramped up so there isn't a year long waiting list like their Roadster--a car for which few people would argue against is a rich-guy toy.

I think you're underestimating how poorly off many people in the Western world really are. BMWs and Lexuses are hardly median income transportation, even in Western countries. (That's not meant as a criticism, just an observation.)

$50k Tesla car vs $25k Chevy Impala(30 mpg). At $4/gallon, and assuming maintenance savings are offset by you actually having to pay for your electricity, it's 6.25k gallons to make up the difference, or 188k miles.

If you assume you're NOT looking at the base model, and instead a $35k car as the 'equivalent, it's $15k/3,750 gallons/113k miles.

Total Annual Cost: $7,850.23 for the Tesla, $6,557.61 of the Impala. Advantage Impala by $1,292.61

Not quite right - that's for a highway driver using the cheapest available. Upping the cost to $31k for a nicer package, and figuring on a 100% city driver(18mpg), that flips it - the Impala's cost rises to $8,667.98, potentially saving you $817.75/year.

Drive a LOT of city miles, like a taxi driver, if the vehicle has the endurance, use it. Otherwise you might as well plug in your own assumptions.

You can play those kinds of games with power from the grid as well so it's probably a mute point. Either way, few would argue whether it's a net savings or an added expense of about $100/month that a luxury sedan shoppable against a BMW 535i is a very difficult choice to ignore a sufficient reason to make a number of companies nervous.

I don't think I'd count a $40k car as being rich man's territory. There are plenty of working class guys who drive F-250's with diesel engines for their work, and those are $40k+. A BMW M3, their best selling car in the US, can approach $45k with all the options.

A $40,000 car, financed for 5 years, at 4% interest with a $5,000 trade is $645 a month. About $7700 per year.

Totally doable on the median household income in the US of $45,000 per year. Wise? A different story, but it's not like you have to be

It's $49.9k *after* the tax credits, so it's not actually $40k. Let's call it $50k to be safer.

The thing is, the Roadster cost $109k, so this is already a huge price drop compared to that. That's been Tesla's strategy all along. The new tech will initially be expensive, so sell it as a premium product and use the revenues from that to develop the tech farther, driving down the cost. They've said that this is a three-phase process, and the model S is the second phase. Even the difference between $109k and $50k is a big one, and it brings the pricing into the affordable range for a much larger number of people, particularly if leasing is considered.

Comparing it to other similar cars, it's not a bad deal either. The Nissan Leaf sells for ~$35k, with a 24 kWh battery. The basic model S sells for ~$50k, with a 40 kWh battery, and is a higher-end vehicle. The range is substantially improved, and there's the (very expensive) option for larger batteries that get it within shouting distance of the range of a gasoline vehicle.

Anyhow, the point was that the model S opens up a much larger market to Tesla, which will give them the revenue and scale to work on the third phase of their plan, an electric car that is cheap enough that it can be afforded by the average person. The Roadster was $109k, the Model S was $50k, and they're planning for their third phase, codenamed BlueStar, to sell for $30k. That's not going to compete with a Toyota Yaris/Vitz, but it could compete favourably with a Camry or Avalon, perhaps. They were originally talking about getting the BlueStar out in 2013-2014, but they're now talking about being able to do it in 2015-2016. I'd imagine that battery pricing/technology is the primary limiting factor at this point.

45 minutes gets you 80% of capacity. If I wanted to drive from Montreal to Toronto (545KM) with the high-capacity model S (480KM range), you're looking at one single 45 minute refueling stop halfway. So yeah, the trip that takes 6h13m in a gas car now takes 6h58m in the electric car, but that's not a huge difference. And, to be honest, most people stop halfway for lunch when driving to Toronto anyhow, so if you can charge midway while eating, you're potentially not using up any extra time at all.

All this presupposes that there's a recharging station halfway between Montreal and Toronto, although since they're the two largest cities in the country and it's one of the most heavily traveled routes in the country, it's not an unreasonable thing to expect we'll see some recharging stations along that route eventually.

It's both. I just spent a similar amount on a lowbrid, but I have to say this is the first electric car done right. Plus it looks incredible on the road (my daily commute takes me from one Tesla plant to the other, and just occasionally you'll see a streetable prototype on that route). On looks alone I should have held out for one.

It accelerates faster than a Porsche 911 and has other luxury features. Ergo it's a rich person's toy. That said, given the performance, the prices seem competitive, even ignoring fuel costs. From a cursory glance at the Porsche website, a new 911 costs around $80k in the U.S. with an estimated range of ~300 miles. Had to use fuel economy estimates for previous years since 2011 is an entirely new platform and the corporate site doesn't publish fuel economy numbers. My issue with the all-electrics is battery replacement. Figure you're plunking down at least $10k at the end of that 8 year warranty to replace your battery.

From a cursory glance at the Porsche website, a new 911 costs around $80k in the U.S./quotePorche uses a nickle-and-dime-you to death pricing model, so equipped as you'd expect a luxury coupe, they're closer to 100K (for the base engine, of course, you can pay arbitratily much for more power).

Battery replacement is a real concern, but cars in this price range aren't cheap to maintain in the first place at that age. When my last luxury car hit 8-9 years old I was planning $3k/year for maintenance (including tires), and that's at the low end - a V12 Mercedes is a dependable $6K/year for the repairman.

There's really not much to break. Engine maintenance will be almost zero. You have the change the brakes and tires, keep the cooling system topped up, and keep some bearings greased but that's about it. No more engine seals, ignition system, fuel system, oil system, gearbox (nothing so complicated anyways), belt-driven engine accessories...and clutches, turbos and intercoolers are right out.

What, because it's electric it won't need ANY maintenance? What planet do you hail from where electric devices don't break down? You realize that a lot of the basic components of a car will probably still exist and require maintenance. Yeah, you won't need oil changes, but stuff is still going to break.

My 6-year old Prius has had the following maintenance (note: this is still a hybrid not fully electric, so it has both electric and gas componentry - but no transmission): routine service, oil changes, wipers, filter changes, tires/alignment, brake lights, 12v battery replaced.

Here's what I haven't done (and have had to do one of these with every other car I owned more than 5 years): Engine resurfacing, transmission replacement, brakes/pads (yes, original brake pads on my Prius are less than 50% worn), ro

Then again, so does a manual transmission, and intelligent downshifting technique - lol!

Sure, you trade a brakepad life for a reduced transmission/clutch lifespan.

I've owned about 3 manual transmission cars (great fun on a switchback, but annoying on stop/go commutes). Until I owned my Prius, I wouldn't dream of giving up that manual control. However, the software drive-by-wire on the Prius really is awesome, and far more responsive, efficient and powerful than an automatic transmission and completely less leg-work than a manual.

The Roadster would compare with the 911... This guy you'd want to compare with their four door (Panamera or some other such silly name). In any case, it is surprisingly price competitive for the luxury sedan market.

i was waiting for picked me up this morning, didnt need to find parking, and costs less than a cup of coffee. the only people still masturbating furiously over Tesla motors and electric cars in general are people who dont understand that the automobile as a means of personal conveyance is unsustainable no matter what you fuel you choose. If you dont believe me, try getting from long beach to downtown LA at 7:30 am.

Protip: pack a change of clothes, and change when you get to work, and a shower isn't necessary. Sweat doesn't stink. Day old sweat stinks because the bacteria have had a long time to grow. Wipe yourself off after a bike ride with baby wipes, and change into fresh clothes, and you won't smell any worse than the guy who sweated it out on the bus, or the out of shape guy who had to walk 400 meters across the parking lot. Also you say that not everyone is in shape enough to do this, but that's only for the

I don't understand why people are complaining that these cars are expensive. That's the nature of technological progress. Early cars were also luxury items but now most people in the developed world can afford one.

Technology can't be forced into being inexpensive. Progress takes time.

As far as I'm concerned, the Tesla S is a revolutionary vehicle that will set the bar for future electric vehicles. And I agree with Elon Musk that all future cars will be electrically powered. Tesla is proving that electric vehicles can 1) be practical, 2) have extended range, 3) not be exorbitantly expensive, 4) be friggin' sexy!!
This is only their second car and they are already hitting a home run. Imagine what the fourth and fifth generation of vehicles will be able to do...
I'm surprised more/.ers aren't impressed with this car... it's a geek's dream!

The prices are NOT $49,900, $59,000 and $69,000. That is the price after you redeem your government coupon (Plug-In Electric Vehicle Credit (IRC 30 and IRC 30D) [irs.gov]). You will still have to front the full price and then wait until your next tax filing in order to claim your maximum tax credit of $7500. The credit itself will be phased out after 200,000 qualifying vehicles have been sold.

I can't help but think that the folks over at Ural motorcycles/IMZ America have a better sense of the market right now. They've just introduced a new "Model T" at the low end of their range, bringing the basic Ural 2-wheel drive sidecar motorcycle to the US for under $10k. [imz-ural.com] Irbit Motorworks (IMZ) is Russian, the design is sourced from midcentury BMW, and the last decade+ of updates (e.g. new cylinders/heads with modern compression, better mpg/reliability, etc) have been pushed by enthusiasts in the US and EU. It intersect with the Tesla in the "sheer fun to drive" category, and my guess is that with an economy just holding on, there's gonna be a lot more of these on the road.

In another post I muttered about T-Mo staying on as the value carrier in the US: "T-Mo isn't making money hand over fist, but they're doing _ok_, and that's good. In these times, in this economy, I want to give my money to an org that's doing _ok_: neither going out of business, nor robbing me. You hear that, T-Mo? "Ok" and "staying in business without f__king your customers" is the new black. So keep on keeping on."

Same goes for Ural/IMZ versus Tesla. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Tesla business model is too "lean on the rich to get thru hard times" which all too often degenerates to "ran outta high-end customers, so try to screw the next class for as much as we need to stay afloat..." You wanna impress me Tesla? Go buy the tooling for the Corbin Merlin or Sparrow [3wheelers.com] and start turning out fun electric 1-seaters for $15k -- price-competitive with the Fiat 500, Smartcar, and Scion iQ.

....keep in mind that ALL brand new techs had to start out as playthings of the rich to help fund the perfection of the tech and the technique such that reproduction could be affordable enough for all. And before YET ANOTHER PERSON starts signing about chestnuts over a volt/tesla fire, keep in mind that thousands of combustion engine vehicles are catching fire every year.

I wonder when electric vehicles will use standardized batteries which can be replaced quickly.

When that happens, it might be possible to pull into a "Battery Exchange" station where your dead/low batteries can be quickly pulled and replaced with freshly conditioned and charged batteries in under two minutes. Your dead/low batteries then go onto the conditioner/charger to be used by the next shmo who pulls in.

Along the same line as propane tank exchanges. You buy the tank once, then keep trading it in for full tanks - only paying for the propane and the exchange fee.

Until battery electric vehicles become popular, stations like this won't be ubiquitous in the same way gas stations are.

1. There is an option for a 5-minute battery swap-out at properly equipped service stations and there's a quick charge option where proper charging equipment can bring the battery from 0% to 80% in 45 minutes. You would likely be more interested in the 5 minute swap in terms of a gas station replacement for long trips, but the vast majority of refills would be resolved with nightly charging, giving the advantage to this car as you can't fill your gasoline vehicle with fuel every night at home - you have to make a special stop once or twice a week and pay out a bunch of money. How often does anyone take a >160/300 mile trip? If it's all the time for you, this isn't the car for you until there are enough service stations doing the 5-minute swap to make it convenient. If you're like the 99% of people in the US and Europe who drive far less than that 99% of the time, this works just fine.

3. The batteries cost $10,000 to replace today. Their cost in 8 - 10 years is extremely difficult to anticipate, but assuming that the materials involved aren't massively more expensive, the technology will certainly be significantly cheaper and should push those prices down.

It's not the same as a gasoline engine. Also, everyone also mentions battery replacement costs, but doesn't think about how much maintenance could be saved over a standard internal combustion engine. No oil changes, no exhaust system problems, possibly increased brake life because stopping energy can be recycled into electricity (not sure if Tesla cars implement this, but future electric cars will). There's a whole bunch of regular maintenance that just disappears once you move to full electric cars. Also, they are much simpler machines, so many less things to break. Do they even have a transmission? I'm not sure how current it is but the wikipedia article states [wikipedia.org]

There is minimal maintenance required of an electric vehicle. Because there is no internal combustion engine, there are no routine oil changes. Transmission, brake, and cooling system fluid changes will be required roughly every five to seven years or as needed. Tesla is the only automaker to offer "house calls" in which mobile service technicians perform routine software upgrades or annual inspections

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me. The cost of replacing the batteries (no doubt with much better batteries) a few years down the road could easily be offset by much cheaper ongoing operating costs.

Perhaps the most important question is what is the all-in cost per mile of operation and how many miles to I need to operate it annually for it to make financial sense. For a SWAG: Assume $0.10/kWh, 3 miles/kWh, or $0.033/mile for electricity, vs. 25 MPG, $3.50/gallon, $0.14/mile for gasoline. Effective difference of $0.10/mile. At a US average annual distance of 12,000 miles, the fuel cost difference is $1,200. Electric vehicle advocates also suggest that you save another $200/yr on oil changes, oil filters, etc.. If you assume an average ownership period of 10 years, that's a $14,000 savings in OpEx. Of course, currently the car is more expensive, you're limited (slightly) in range, and there are (currently) limited number of places where you can fast-charge (15-20 minutes full charge).

Different class of vehicle. This is a luxury vehicle with leather interior and a 0-60 in 4.4 seconds. It competes with BMW, Mercedes and Porshe.

How much does a full featured BMW or Porsche go for? $50,000 no longer looks over priced for it's class.

In fact, it might look pretty damn cheap. I just looked at the base pricing MSRP for a Porsche Panerama (or whatever it was, there 4 door sedan). The low end model does 0-60 in 6 seconds. Higher end model

How many people routinely drive 200-300 miles? That's somewhere between 2 1/2 and 4 hours at highway speeds, depending on the speed limits where you live. In my neck of the woods, 120 miles is a really long commute. Yeah, people sometimes drive cross-country to visit relatives and friends or for business, but that's hardly typical (i.e., day-in, day-out) usage. And if you can afford a high-end luxury sedan, you probably can afford more than one car, so the

80% quick charges for EVs generally are down in the 10-15 minute range. No, that's not 2 minutes (what the hell do you drive anyway and 40+ gallon tank SUV?) but you might wish to look at it from a slightly different angle. 10-15 minutes and less than $5 for off the grid power, or 2 minutes and $3.50+ per gallon for gas/diesel. It's a habit changes certainly, but not many people value the 10 or so minutes saved at $100.

Can it be refueled from empty to full in 2 minutes like a gasoline engine? What is the battery lifespan? How much will they cost to be replaced?

Planning ahead is something thats needed no matter what you drive. No one embarks on a 300 mile roadtrip with the gas gauge blinking red. This one will have the "large LCD display" reminding you to recharge. The battery lifespan is usually in the excess of 100,000 miles, with typical NiMH batteries giving between 130,000-150,000 mile range. At this point, the batteries are expensive, but if you consider the amount of saving in fuel costs, oil changes, all sorts of filters and pumps, etc. over the course of

Don't make me link the study showing that even an electric car running on a dirty coal plant is much cleaner than a gasoline car AGAIN. And don't make me point out that making cars energy-source-agnostic makes it possible to make whole regions cleaner just by changing the power source AGAIN.

There are a few and they all deal with plug-in hybrids, and it turns out it's not so simple for EVs. Non-plug-in hybrids are cleaner on 100% dirty coal but PHEVs and pure EVs aren't because it turns out 100% dirty coal is actually worse than gasoline:

Forgive me if I'm being a bit presumptuous about your own beliefs, however, I feel the need to rant a bit here. I am simply sick and tired of people seemingly determined to attack or attempt to discredit anything related to green policies. I find it ridiculous that so many climate skeptics want to turn it into an 'us versus them' game where you have to tear down everything the other side supports.

I'm a climate skeptic myself. I'm skeptical that man has as much to do with climate change as many seem to belie

Battery swapping is going to seem like a laughably silly idea 10 years from now. I think it's silly right now myself.

EV makers should stop trying to appease the "range anxiety" crowd, they can't be appeased. Have battery swap stations at every corner and cars with a 500 mile range and they'll be "anxious" about getting a dud battery and breaking down in the desert they drive through every morning.

I mean the high-end model goes 300 miles. There are only two reasons to have a problem with that range: You actually drive further than that regularly, in which case you have no business driving an electric car right now anyways, or you've got some kind of "range survivalist syndrome" where you're always worried about "what if I run out of juice and then ZOMBIES ATTACK!?"

Battery swapping is going to seem like a laughably silly idea 10 years from now. I think it's silly right now myself.

I agree. It was successful about a century ago. Today, it's just hype from Shai Agassi of Better Place. (I've met him. He's all hat and no cattle. After five years of hype, all they've installed are a couple of demo sites and a 3 taxicab demo in Tokyo.)

EV makers should stop trying to appease the "range anxiety" crowd, they can't be appeased.

While this is true, it is nice for the "every man" that they do. If they focused on the average persons needs, the cars would only go 60 or so miles. As they push into the realm of 300 m.p.c. and beyond they start to make a car that is on par with a gasoline car fro the "everyman".

I think its easier to make it almost a "luxury" item and drive it down market than the opposite. Harder to make a super cheap low end electric car and then convince upper-middle class and beyond to buy in to the "cheap electric cars". Not to mention the high relative cost to produce electric vehicles initially can be shouldered mostly by higher income individuals.

I mean the high-end model goes 300 miles. There are only two reasons to have a problem with that range: You actually drive further than that regularly, in which case you have no business driving an electric car right now anyways, or you've got some kind of "range survivalist syndrome" where you're always worried about "what if I run out of juice and then ZOMBIES ATTACK!?"

Or the other logical reason is that sometimes you drive farther than that. I would love to get an electric car, and it would handle 98% of my driving. But I'm single and it would be my only car, so the times I do need to drive farther I would be out of luck. I sometime (maybe bimonthly) travel between 150 and 300 miles to regional cities for concerts. Even a 300 mile range is risky since I can't guarantee that I will be able to charge it where I am going.

Well for bimonthly I'd say an EV doesn't make sense right now, but for those who only do it once or twice a year it might be worth it to just rent an ICE car for those trips. I wouldn't be surprised if it paid off in gas savings.

I live in a hurricane zone and know what it is like to not be able to refuel anywhere in a 200 mile radius with a gas vehicle. And yes, the hordes pouring out of New Orleans as the city floods can seem very zombie like.

Yeah, and? Our Honda Civic costs less than half as much, goes at least 50% further, and takes a fraction of the time to 'recharge'. We can just manage to drive to my girlfriend's parents house on one tank, whereas if we bought this 'luxury sedan' we'd have to stop for a few hours half-way to charge up... except there's nowhere to do so.

Why would you want a 'luxury sedan' that can't make long journeys, or requires you to hang around waiting for hours on the few routes where you can?

It's not a life-threatening problem unless you live in the remote hills of North Dakota or something. 300 miles is like a 30MPG car with a 10-gallon tank. For the person who suddenly needed to exceed their car's capabilities and can't wait for a half-hour quick charge at the nearest station, there's always the option of calling a tow truck. Not the end of the world.

Yeah, but when you go driving in a snow storm, make sure you are prepared. I'm from Canada, so this is common sense to us. Whenever driving in the winter you should have a survival kit with you, complete with blankets, food, shovel, first aid kit, chemical heat packs, matches, emergency candles, etc.... Even if you don't run out of gas or electricity, what happens if you go off the road, or a belt on your car breaks?

Until they figure out solar, natural gas is the next big thing. Easy to retrofit, no batteries. Cheap (at least in the US).

Next big thing??? Its been a standard thing in many other places in the world for a long long time. Its probably only slow to take off in the US because (compared globally) the US has very cheap gas prices.

Until they figure out solar, natural gas is the next big thing. Easy to retrofit, no batteries. Cheap (at least in the US).

Yeah, if you completely forget about supply and demand. How cheap do you think that natural gas is going to be once it's a common fuel for cars? Hint: look at the price and prevalence of diesel from 1980 to now.

Arg.. Okay, time for today's math lesson.
If you increase demand, you increase the price. If you increase the demand by 200 million cars (roughly the number of working vehicles in the country, assuming the average adult has 1 car), then you increased demand by a metric shit-ton. You really think the prices will stay the same?

As the owner of an electric Nissan LEAF, a hybrid Toyota Prius, and a CNG Honda Civic GX I can tell you the car I'm getting rid of right now. Hint: it's the one with the limited range, limited fueling infrastructure, fuel storage method expiration date of 15 years or less, no trunk space, and limited amenities.

If you guess the LEAF or Prius you'd be wrong. We've enjoyed our Civic GX, and it's proven to be a reliable car, but cost and convenience wise it can't hold a candle to the LEAF now that we've taken delivery and been driving the car for 6 months.

Plugging in the LEAF is significantly more convenient than driving to the nearest CNG station (6 miles away) and hoping their pump is operating. If it's not then it's a 12 mile drive to the next CNG station which usually has a queue of buses, garbage trucks, or taxis lined up meaning a 30 minute wait. The CNG cylinder has a legally mandated expiration date of 15 years and would cost more than the value of the rest of the car to replace when that time is up. Maintenance for the car is very costly, requiring special CNG fuel line filters changed every other service (about $800 when we go to the Civic GX friendly dealer in the desert, closer to $1500 at the regular Honda dealer in town) as well as cylinder inspections and certifications, and all that doesn't even get you out of having to do a smog check in California.

The LEAF by comparison plugs in anywhere from public quick-charge DC stations (20-30 minute charge) to home 240V and 120V connections. It also requires no regular maintenance beyond topping up windshield washer fluid and having the tires rotated. The energy cost is about half of what we pay at the CNG station, and a quarter of what we pay to fuel the Prius. The trunk is huge and the back seats fold down for even more room. The car is fast, quiet, and comfortable and makes the Prius feel quaint and old fashioned. The Civic GX feels like a horse drawn buggy by comparison - it's sluggish (the CNG version has about 30HP less than the petrol version of the Civic and it has a heavy CNG cylinder to lug around), has no trunk space, and has all the noise and shaking you get with ICE cars.

But hey, if you're interested in a nice clean Civic GX with a little over 100,000 miles then ignore all that, I've got a car to sell you!

There are supply issues (no infrastructure both on the source and dispense), there are range issues--similar to a Tesla style EV and more like a battery only Volt or Leaf on a retrofit), there are horse-power issues, cold weather starting issues, and there are no consumer safe fill the tank solutions. Further, any kind of compressed/liquified gas solution would require strict and frequent inspection to remain safe. CNG/LP was probably the best alternative back in the 1970's when we were hit with the so-ca

Don't think you will be getting a shout out anytime soon.These cars are for daily commute, and some occasional long distance trips. People hauling heavy cargo over long distances isn't the target demographics.

I'd much rather my tax dollars went to electric vehicle manufacturers trying to get off the ground and make waves in the system than to companies that have been recording record profits the past few years in a row (looking at you Exxon...).